ESPN's coverage of the Memphis/Rose/Calipari story

I don't receive the English-speaking version of ESPN here in Peru, so perhaps my following statements might prove to be foolish because this story's getting discussed ad nauseum on PTI, Around the Horn, Sportscenter, etc. etc. However, as someone who gains much of their information from the various national sports websites, I find ESPN's coverage a bit odd. Don't misunderstand-ESPN hasn't avoided this story; there are at least two written stories and at least two video clips covering the story on espn.com. However, what I find missing from the coverage is commentary from the large staff of college basketball writers that ESPN employs. On one of the video clips, Pat Forde (who many Kentucky fans claim to be anti-Wildcat because he's a Louisville grad) offers commentary on Calipari which lasts about twenty seconds and basically says his legacy will likely be tarnished. The espn.com college basketball website states there are seven columnists devoted to college basketball, some journalists (Forde, Dana O'Neil, Andy Katz, Mark Schalbach) and others commentators (Jay Bilas, Doug Gottlieb, Dick Vitale). None of them, outside of Forde's brief comment that was broadcast on espn news, has had an article or column offering their opinions on this story and how it affects Calipari/Kentucky.

How does that compare with the other national websites?

cbs sportsline has two columnists who strongly question Calipari:
<a href="http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/11793826" target="blank" >Gary Parrish</a>
<a href="http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/6264363/15271371" target="blank" >Mike Freeman's blog</a>

yahoo sports, which farms out regular college basketball coverage to rivals.com, has a column from Dan Wetzel:
<a href="http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/news?slug=dw-calipari052809&prov=yhoo&type=lgns" target="blank" >Blue Mood at UK</a>

foxsports.com is pretty much comprised of Jeff Goodman on college hoops, who offers his commentary, plus from a young reporter's blog:
<a href="http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/9620504/Memphis-scandal-won%27t-stick-to-Calipari" target="blank" >Goodman's column</a>
<a href="http://community.foxsports.com/blogs/jherwitt/2009/05/28/Calipari_wont_be_sweating_this_one_either" target="blank" >Herwitt's blog</a>

Over at si.com, Luke Winn offers his own take on the allegations:
<a href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/luke_winn/05/28/memphis/index.html?eref=T1" target="blank" >Calipari fever</a>


All this commentary, basically all saying the same thing, but ESPN's not joining in the fun. Although I can get down with the argument that these are all accusations without a bit of proof behind them, I depart if you try to tell me that ESPN all of a sudden got religion and decided they wouldn't subject someone to opinion before all the facts come in.

If you're looking for a conspiracy theory, ask why not one of espn's stable of college basketball reporters hasn't written an opinion piece on this story.

Pat Forde has written an article on ESPN.com. It is currently the headline story on the men's basketball page.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=4213475

Oh man, all those deep thoughts of mine and words put down on the keyboard, and Forde sneaks a column in to make me look foolish! I swear, the column wasn't up when I began my soapbox rant

Throw in DeCourcey's two cents as well

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=553953

And Pat Forde has an axe to grind. Frankly, I question his integrity at this point as a journalist.

Truth, a question

Trying to put all the other stuff to the side (the NCAA's own issues, the theory that Calipari may be no worse or better than some of the saints of the game), I have a few questions: Are you concerned at all with Calipari coming to Kentucky? Do you think his reputation, deserved or not, will always overshadow the accomplishments he may reach at UK? Do you think the media will seize upon this perfect storm of stereotypical slick coach with stereotypical rabid, 'win at all costs' fanbase to create enough allegations that the NCAA will have to keep a close eye on UK throughout his tenure as coach? Do you think this will be a peaceful marriage between Cal and UK or will it always be clouded over because of allegations/rumors/misdeeds/etc?

coolhandgopher said:

Trying to put all the other stuff to the side (the NCAA's own issues, the theory that Calipari may be no worse or better than some of the saints of the game), I have a few questions: Are you concerned at all with Calipari coming to Kentucky? Do you think his reputation, deserved or not, will always overshadow the accomplishments he may reach at UK? Do you think the media will seize upon this perfect storm of stereotypical slick coach with stereotypical rabid, 'win at all costs' fanbase to create enough allegations that the NCAA will have to keep a close eye on UK throughout his tenure as coach? Do you think this will be a peaceful marriage between Cal and UK or will it always be clouded over because of allegations/rumors/misdeeds/etc?

Click to expand...

UK was Win At All Costs under Rupp, Hall, and Sutton. They spanned 5 decades at UK.

coolhandgopher said:

Trying to put all the other stuff to the side (the NCAA's own issues, the theory that Calipari may be no worse or better than some of the saints of the game), I have a few questions:

Click to expand...

Are you concerned at all with Calipari coming to Kentucky?

Click to expand...

The only concerns I have are some of the chances he takes with guys with murky/clouded backgrounds. On one hand, it's admirable if it works out. You give a kid a chance to make something of himself. On the other, it can backfire on you and cause a host of problems. I have faith in Sandy Bell and UK's Compliance department to oversee things-A department who reported secondary violations to the NCAA about Myspace of all things.

Do you think his reputation, deserved or not, will always overshadow the accomplishments he may reach at UK?

Click to expand...

If he is successful yes. That's just the nature of the beast. I remember UofL fans screaming that Pitino was dirty and other fans saying he did this or that.

Do you think the media will seize upon this perfect storm of stereotypical slick coach with stereotypical rabid, 'win at all costs' fanbase to create enough allegations that the NCAA will have to keep a close eye on UK throughout his tenure as coach?

Click to expand...

That "close eye" will always exist at UK. I think people don't understand UK's relationship with the local media. They are not homers in the slightest. Tubby and Jerry Tipton didn't really care for each other and I've shared the story in the past about Tipton hiding in the bushes taking photto's of Rajon Rondo's high priced SUV to try to create a story...that if he had checked with Compliance would have found the NCAA had already investigated and cleared it.

Look no further than the Chuck Hayes rape allegation and how it was covered by both the LHL and the LCJ in comparison to the Sypher/Pitino story.

Do you think this will be a peaceful marriage between Cal and UK or will it always be clouded over because of allegations/rumors/misdeeds/etc?

Click to expand...

Define "peaceful". Are things "peaceful" between Alabama and UT football? Or Florida and FSU/Miami?

There's always going to be something going because it's Kentucky and therefore journalists automatically assume it is news. The "drama" that was the 2001-2002 basketball season at UK proves that. Every incident got blown up to epic proportions: Fights among players on charter flights, players getting busted with fake ID's at bars, Rashaad Carruth refusing to shoot in a game in protest.. End of the world it was.

UK will be watching Cal very closely and from what I have read they already knew of this potential allegation. UK administrators have been burned before so hopefully they have finally learned their lessons. I can guess that much has been discussed and settled about Cal's methods and contacts. What lines cannot be crossed and who is keeping tabs.

I suspect not too much is written or insinuated as the regular (and bigger) beat writers are protecting their status among coaches. We have read about the corners that are cut and the deals that are made and the gray areas that are too dark throughout college Basketball. Writers know about them, too, but if they want access they cannot "cross the line".

Sometimes the comments are so transparent to the point of being humorous. UK administrators and lawyers were "surprised" by BG's lawsuit - yet- they filed a counter suit the very next day. Com'on, name two people who were "surprised"! BG probably didn't get any offers to coach elsewhere this coming season so what does he have to lose?

CollegeBBallFan said:

UK will be watching Cal very closely and from what I have read they already knew of this potential allegation. UK administrators have been burned before so hopefully they have finally learned their lessons. I can guess that much has been discussed and settled about Cal's methods and contacts. What lines cannot be crossed and who is keeping tabs.

I suspect not too much is written or insinuated as the regular (and bigger) beat writers are protecting their status among coaches. We have read about the corners that are cut and the deals that are made and the gray areas that are too dark throughout college Basketball. Writers know about them, too, but if they want access they cannot "cross the line".

Sometimes the comments are so transparent to the point of being humorous. UK administrators and lawyers were "surprised" by BG's lawsuit - yet- they filed a counter suit the very next day. Com'on, name two people who were "surprised"! BG probably didn't get any offers to coach elsewhere this coming season so what does he have to lose?

Click to expand...

Good post and a fair one. I don't have confirmation on this but Matt Jones indicated that Gillispie went hard after the Washington State job and got turned down.

I have a few questions the truth

Do you think that the Kentucky job is as great of job it was in the past? The reason I ask that is that you have run off one of the most respected coaches in the game and tossed another after only 2 years.

How long do Coach Cal have if he doesn't win?

What happens if though this Memphis deal it is found out that Cal has committed NCAA infractions? Does he get tossed at Kentucky?

mnboiler said:

I have a few questions the truth

Do you think that the Kentucky job is as great of job it was in the past? The reason I ask that is that you have run off one of the most respected coaches in the game and tossed another after only 2 years.

How long do Coach Cal have if he doesn't win?

What happens if though this Memphis deal it is found out that Cal has committed NCAA infractions? Does he get tossed at Kentucky?

Click to expand...

The "average" UK coaching tenure (post Rupp) is about 7 or 8 years.

mnboiler said:

I have a few questions the truth

Do you think that the Kentucky job is as great of job it was in the past? The reason I ask that is that you have run off one of the most respected coaches in the game and tossed another after only 2 years.

Click to expand...

I disagree with your framing of the question but I'll bite: Yes, it's still a great job (and the media all concurred) but it lost it's luster somewhat under Tubby Smith-a sentiment that was expressed by many people. We can argue why that was all day long (and frankly, I'm tired of it. I've made my points. If people would stop bringing it up and move on to something else I would think everyone would benefit) but it's a fact

How long do Coach Cal have if he doesn't win?

Click to expand...

The misconception is that you have to win a national championship every year at Kentucky or you're fired. Yes, there is a fringe 1% (which given the size of the fanbase and our easy access to globe spanning, instant information technology makes that fringe really, really loud) who demand perfection but those exist everywhere especially at historically great programs. I'm sure there are some Gopher hockey nuts (actually I'm certain there are. I found a few at the Gopher hockey site. It was like reading some of the yahoo's on TCP's Rupps Rafters) who'll say Frozen Four or bust every season.

Calipari has to regain UK's place in the SEC, has to get UK back into the Top 20/10, get on that 1-4 line in the tourney seeding and has to compete on the national level again with its peers and that means competiting for (not making..because it is very hard) for titles and FF appearances.

What happens if though this Memphis deal it is found out that Cal has committed NCAA infractions? Does he get tossed at Kentucky?

Click to expand...

Yes, he will be gone but it doesn't look like this is Calipari's fault. Rose went through the NCAA's Clearinghouse and was cleared to play. They used the WGolf and Soccer to conduct an 18 month long investigation into the entire athletic department and all they found was a bookkeeping error and this Rose situation which looks more and more like a Simeon High School/Rose issue than a Memphis/Calipari issue.

Unless you think that Calipari knowingly altered Rose's grade, faked his test in Chicago and got that all past the NCAA Clearinghouse. That's a big leap. I'm more inclined to believe he looked the other way or had some knowledge of the Camby deal than I am in this.

I'm actually shocked that this kind of thing doesn't happen more with high profile kids. Kids cheat and athletes get their grades changed at high schools all around the country and the great majority of them don't have the future stardom and millions in front of them that Rose had.

The real shame in all that is if it is proven that Rose was ineligible by fraud how was Memphis supposed to know? He got through the NCAA Clearinghouse and if Memphis is proven to not know how could the NCAA punish them for that? Was Memphis supposed to proctor the test for him? They acted on good faith, admitted a student cleared by the NCAA in terms of eligibility, and proceeded as such. The only thing I can gather, based on some interviews, is that the NCAA is "leaning" on Tim Flowers and threatening his eligibility to spill something he might have on Rose. This isn't a Camby situation or a Corey Maggette deal where you could possibly infer that the coaching staff knew what was going and used an ineligible player. This is something completely different and punishing Memphis for it is absurd.

1990 To 1997 Then 1998 To 2007

UK had 2nd most W (overall) and 3rd most W in NCAA games from 90 to 97. UK won 1 NCAA title and 2 SEC titles (3 if you count 1991) plus 5 SECT championships in 8 years. 27-6 avg record.

UK had 4th most W (overall) and 5th most W in NCAA games from 98 to 07. UK won 1 NCAA title and 5 SEC titles plus 5 SECT championships in 10 years. 26-8 avg record.

If 2nd / 3rd dropping to 4th / 5h is "losing luster" then so be it judged.

In reality, UK really lost its luster by hiring an idiot like Gillispie.

The Truth said:

Good post and a fair one. I don't have confirmation on this but Matt Jones indicated that Gillispie went hard after the Washington State job and got turned down.

Click to expand...

I would be interested to get some validation of this. Everyone knows that if Pat Knight struggles at Texas Tech he is gone soon and I believe it will be Gillispie's job to have. He is a native Texan who is still very respected in the state and has done well at both UTEP and A&M and has connections with many of the high school coaches there.

Back to the original topic of this thread. I have noticed ESPNs lack of coverage as well. When the UCONN thing broke, they were all over it. I was actually surprised about that considering UCONN is located right in ESPNs backyard. I think there is less coverage of the Memphis scandal because of their new huge contract with the SEC. They want SEC basketball to rise back up to levels it used to be so that they games they are forced to broadcast for the next 20 years are the highest level of college basketball around. Promoting this scandal would be detrimental because of Calipari's involvement. The future of the SEC depends on Kentucky returning to national power status and this can't happen with a head coach that embroiled in scandal. It is in ESPNs interest to keep this scandal on the DL.

Back to the original topic of this thread. I have noticed ESPNs lack of coverage as well. When the UCONN thing broke, they were all over it. I was actually surprised about that considering UCONN is located right in ESPNs backyard. I think there is less coverage of the Memphis scandal because of their new huge contract with the SEC. They want SEC basketball to rise back up to levels it used to be so that they games they are forced to broadcast for the next 20 years are the highest level of college basketball around. Promoting this scandal would be detrimental because of Calipari's involvement. The future of the SEC depends on Kentucky returning to national power status and this can't happen with a head coach that embroiled in scandal. It is in ESPNs interest to keep this scandal on the DL.

Click to expand...

I'm not so sure. It seems on Catspause most of the complaints about the media are from the coverage they're getting from ESPN, namely from Pat Forde. I believe Calipari was on " outside the lines " today.

There's a Memphis writer from the Commercial Appeal that's really hammering him - and Pat Forde of course.

During an appearance on ESPN’s Outside the Lines program on Friday, columnist Geoff Calkins of the Memphis Commercial Appeal harshly criticized how Kentucky Coach John Calipari does his basketball business.

“John runs programs where scoundrels run the place,” Calkins said.

Calkins and ESPN senior writer Pat Forde noted that Kentucky had fired two coaches ? Eddie Sutton in basketball and Hal Mumme in football ? despite those men not being named in major violations.

Calipari also appeared on the show. He said that people who know him do not have questions about how he runs his basketball programs.

Earlier this week, it became known that the NCAA had alleged major violations involving academic fraud and improper payment of travel expenses in Calipari’s Memphis program.

Click to expand...

Calipari's daughter has put a number of facebook updates on Forde. Calipari has gone so far as to update his Twitter with an apology.

http://twitter.com/ukcoachcalipari

http://kentucky.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?SID=888&fid=1383&style=2&tid=128717445&Page=1

The Truth thanks for your comments but the what I was asking about more so in the lost luster in the job had to do more with the nuts on Catspause having incredibily high expecation(I saw some one on CP say something about 4 NC in 8 years is possible). So really my question is do you think because of the insanely high expecations do you think the Kentucky job is any less valued as it once was?

ChemEGopher said:

Back to the original topic of this thread. I have noticed ESPNs lack of coverage as well. When the UCONN thing broke, they were all over it. I was actually surprised about that considering UCONN is located right in ESPNs backyard. I think there is less coverage of the Memphis scandal because of their new huge contract with the SEC. They want SEC basketball to rise back up to levels it used to be so that they games they are forced to broadcast for the next 20 years are the highest level of college basketball around. Promoting this scandal would be detrimental because of Calipari's involvement. The future of the SEC depends on Kentucky returning to national power status and this can't happen with a head coach that embroiled in scandal. It is in ESPNs interest to keep this scandal on the DL.

Click to expand...

Ding, ding, ding. They are in bed big-time with the SEC at this point, and they basically agreed to televise every SEC basketball game because they wanted the football package that badly. There are a lot of bad basketball teams in the SEC right now, and no great ones. With Florida having returned to the land of medicore, they NEED UK to be a national draw again.

Can you honestly say they wouldn't be hyping this 5x harder if Coach Cal had just taken the job at Indiana?

mnboiler said:

The Truth thanks for your comments but the what I was asking about more so in the lost luster in the job had to do more with the nuts on Catspause having incredibily high expecation(I saw some one on CP say something about 4 NC in 8 years is possible). So really my question is do you think because of the insanely high expecations do you think the Kentucky job is any less valued as it once was?

Click to expand...

Depends on how much value you put into message boards I suppose. Nick Saban's under pretty high expectations at Alabama but he's pretty well compensated for it.

Listen, I have a hard time crying for coaches making millions of dollars a year. Do I feel some sympathy for them at the loss of privacy when they're at a high profile job? Sure, but when you sign up for some of these high profile jobs and are compensated like that you're well aware of some of the sacrifices. Some coaches eat that stuff up and others just want to coach and not deal with the spotlight.



As to the media coverage of this story just my opinion but I'd stay away from ESPN, Pat Forde, The Memphis Commercial-Appeal, The Lexington Herald Leader and the Louisville Courier Journal if you want solid and unbiased reporting. I'd stick with Wetzel, Gary Parrish, Jeff Goodman, Mike DeCoursey and the Chicago Sun-Times. I feel the others (especially Forde) are not reporting so much as seeking to create and drive the story in a certain editorial direction.

all the dirty programs disgust me, Coach Cal has obviously run to a dirty program, but Kentucky already was shady, this will just put them over the edge, again.

Mr. Samsonite said:

all the dirty programs disgust me, Coach Cal has obviously run to a dirty program, but Kentucky already was shady, this will just put them over the edge, again.

Click to expand...

No program (especially those at the highest levels of D-1 i.e. the "major" programs) are totally clean. Not Kentucky, not Minnesota, not Duke, not North Carolina or Florida or UCLA and on and on. All have some level of dirt to them and if the NCAA had the time, funding, inclination and ability to do something about it I would assure you that probably at least 50% (and I'm being generous here) of those teams would be on probation in any given year.

The NCAA doesn't do it because of the risk to its and its members revenue streams. Which is why you see more and more infractions and probation (an absurd amount) going to lesser sports and slaps on the wrist being handed out to the football and basketball programs. Sure, every now and then they make an "example" of a major program but even those are fairly tame as opposed to previous years.

The Truth said:

No program (especially those at the highest levels of D-1 i.e. the "major" programs) are totally clean. Not Kentucky, not Minnesota, not Duke, not North Carolina or Florida or UCLA and on and on. All have some level of dirt to them and if the NCAA had the time, funding, inclination and ability to do something about it I would assure you that probably at least 50% (and I'm being generous here) of those teams would be on probation in any given year.

The NCAA doesn't do it because of the risk to its and its members revenue streams. Which is why you see more and more infractions and probation (an absurd amount) going to lesser sports and slaps on the wrist being handed out to the football and basketball programs. Sure, every now and then they make an "example" of a major program but even those are fairly tame as opposed to previous years.

Click to expand...

Kentucky leads with 4 NCAA sanctions (1953, 1976, 1988, 1989) in basketball and 3 more (1964, 1976, 2002) in football.